News:

if there were no need for 'engineers from the quantum plenum' then we should not have any unanswered scientific questions.

Main Menu

The Ballad of St Tommy

Started by Recusant, May 30, 2018, 11:14:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Davin

Quote from: Tom62 on June 06, 2018, 07:27:04 PM
My thoughts about Nazi's, Alt-Right and Antifa are similar like the views described in this article.

QuoteThe initiation of extralegal street violence by self-appointed judges in masks is ethically wrong, legally wrong, and in the case of Antifa, tactically idiotic. (I can think of nothing more likely to contribute to Donald Trump's reelection than roving bands of masked, violent leftists attacking not only Nazis carrying swastikas in the streets, but journalists covering protests, or crowds at Ann Coulter or Milo Yiannopolous speeches.) It is an easy call for me to denounce Antifa members who participate in or endorse extralegal violence. That does not contradict my simultaneous judgment that Antifa's stated end of resisting fascism is laudable. If they showed up in force to protest Nazi rallies, but refrained from initiating the use of force, using it only lawfully in self defense, I would have nothing but praise for them.

Like how similar? If the Nazi's and the alt right weren't violent you, "would have nothing but praise for them"?
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Arturo

As far as I know, all Nazis endorse violence against anyone who isn't white. And the Alt-Right are just as racist as anyone else but they don't explicitly endorse current racist groups.
It's Okay To Say You're Welcome
     Just let people be themselves.
     Arturo The1  リ壱

Recusant

Quote from: Davin on June 06, 2018, 09:24:15 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on June 06, 2018, 07:27:04 PM
My thoughts about Nazi's, Alt-Right and Antifa are similar like the views described in this article.

QuoteThe initiation of extralegal street violence by self-appointed judges in masks is ethically wrong, legally wrong, and in the case of Antifa, tactically idiotic. (I can think of nothing more likely to contribute to Donald Trump's reelection than roving bands of masked, violent leftists attacking not only Nazis carrying swastikas in the streets, but journalists covering protests, or crowds at Ann Coulter or Milo Yiannopolous speeches.) It is an easy call for me to denounce Antifa members who participate in or endorse extralegal violence. That does not contradict my simultaneous judgment that Antifa's stated end of resisting fascism is laudable. If they showed up in force to protest Nazi rallies, but refrained from initiating the use of force, using it only lawfully in self defense, I would have nothing but praise for them.

Like how similar? If the Nazi's and the alt right weren't violent you, "would have nothing but praise for them"?

It seems clear to me that Tom62 is stating that his views are similar to those expressed in the quote, which is unequivocal in rejecting Nazi sympathies. I think that to imply otherwise is gratuitously uncharitable, to put it mildly.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Davin

Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 01:40:22 AM
Quote from: Davin on June 06, 2018, 09:24:15 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on June 06, 2018, 07:27:04 PM
My thoughts about Nazi's, Alt-Right and Antifa are similar like the views described in this article.

QuoteThe initiation of extralegal street violence by self-appointed judges in masks is ethically wrong, legally wrong, and in the case of Antifa, tactically idiotic. (I can think of nothing more likely to contribute to Donald Trump's reelection than roving bands of masked, violent leftists attacking not only Nazis carrying swastikas in the streets, but journalists covering protests, or crowds at Ann Coulter or Milo Yiannopolous speeches.) It is an easy call for me to denounce Antifa members who participate in or endorse extralegal violence. That does not contradict my simultaneous judgment that Antifa's stated end of resisting fascism is laudable. If they showed up in force to protest Nazi rallies, but refrained from initiating the use of force, using it only lawfully in self defense, I would have nothing but praise for them.

Like how similar? If the Nazi's and the alt right weren't violent you, "would have nothing but praise for them"?

It seems clear to me that Tom62 is stating that his views are similar to those expressed in the quote, which is unequivocal in rejecting Nazi sympathies. I think that to imply otherwise is gratuitously uncharitable, to put it mildly.
How is that clear to you? He said that his views on Nazis, the alt right, and antifa are similar to an article that says about antifa, "If they showed up in force to protest Nazi rallies, but refrained from initiating the use of force, using it only lawfully in self defense, I would have nothing but praise for them."

So I'm just wondering if his views are so similar that if the Nazis and the alt right weren't violent, would he also have nothing but respect for them. He already showed support for the EDL which is popular for the alt right so I don't think it's an uncharitable interpretation or question, but more of one paying attention to the conversation.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Recusant

Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 02:50:19 PMHow is that clear to you?

It's clear to me because even though it may be phrased inexpertly, I understand the sense of what he's saying. Nor am I completely unfamiliar with Tom62, and I'm not inclined to think the worst of people, even if we don't entirely agree on political matters. Tom62 has been a member of this site even longer than I have, and has never once even hinted that he sympathizes with Nazis.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Davin

Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 03:31:34 PM
Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 02:50:19 PMHow is that clear to you?

It's clear to me because even though it may be phrased inexpertly, I understand the sense of what he's saying. Nor am I completely unfamiliar with Tom62, and I'm not inclined to think the worst of people, even if we don't entirely agree on political matters. Tom62 has been a member of this site even longer than I have, and has never once even hinted that he sympathizes with Nazis.
That's great for you to have so many other sources not available to us.

For those of us who have to rely on what was said and how it was said, and the clear and the unequivocal support of one group in particular, added to that post making it look the way it do. How can you say that my question was "gratuitously uncharitable"? Also adding in "to put it mildly" implying that categorizing my question as "gratuitously uncharitable" was itself charitable, doesn't make sense for those of us limited to facts available to us.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Recusant

Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 03:46:54 PM
Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 03:31:34 PM
Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 02:50:19 PMHow is that clear to you?

It's clear to me because even though it may be phrased inexpertly, I understand the sense of what he's saying. Nor am I completely unfamiliar with Tom62, and I'm not inclined to think the worst of people, even if we don't entirely agree on political matters. Tom62 has been a member of this site even longer than I have, and has never once even hinted that he sympathizes with Nazis.
That's great for you to have so many other sources not available to us.

For those of us who have to rely on what was said and how it was said, and the clear and the unequivocal support of one group in particular, added to that post making it look the way it do. How can you say that my question was "gratuitously uncharitable"? Also adding in "to put it mildly" implying that categorizing my question as "gratuitously uncharitable" was itself charitable, doesn't make sense for those of us limited to facts available to us.

I'm not going on any "other sources." Tom62 has posted over 4,000 times on this site--that's my source. Unless you've been ignoring everything he's posted in his years here, you have practically the same information available to you as I have available to me. I was being charitable to you in what I wrote, whether you choose to believe it or not.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Davin

Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 05:55:54 PM
Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 03:46:54 PM
Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 03:31:34 PM
Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 02:50:19 PMHow is that clear to you?

It's clear to me because even though it may be phrased inexpertly, I understand the sense of what he's saying. Nor am I completely unfamiliar with Tom62, and I'm not inclined to think the worst of people, even if we don't entirely agree on political matters. Tom62 has been a member of this site even longer than I have, and has never once even hinted that he sympathizes with Nazis.
That's great for you to have so many other sources not available to us.

For those of us who have to rely on what was said and how it was said, and the clear and the unequivocal support of one group in particular, added to that post making it look the way it do. How can you say that my question was "gratuitously uncharitable"? Also adding in "to put it mildly" implying that categorizing my question as "gratuitously uncharitable" was itself charitable, doesn't make sense for those of us limited to facts available to us.

I'm not going on any "other sources." Tom62 has posted over 4,000 times on this site--that's my source. Unless you've been ignoring everything he's posted in his years here, you have practically the same information available to you as I have available to me. I was being charitable to you in what I wrote, whether you choose to believe it or not.
If you had read the posts leading up the question in question, then you have noticed that I was being charitable of him by asking for clarification before jumping to conclusions. I don't want to assume incorrectly and I'd prefer to get clarification. If you were as charitable with me as I was with him, this whole tangent would have been unnecessary and likely not existed at all.

From my past experiences with you combined with your characterizing my question as a "gratuitously uncharitable" interpretation in your "putting it mildly," I cannot accept that you were being charitable towards me. Yours appears to be a very uncharitable comment even if slyly worded.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Recusant

Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 08:58:57 PMFrom my past experiences with you combined with your characterizing my question as a "gratuitously uncharitable" interpretation in your "putting it mildly," I cannot accept that you were being charitable towards me. Yours appears to be a very uncharitable comment even if slyly worded.

You're completely entitled to your opinion, Davin.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Sandra Craft

Quote from: Davin on June 06, 2018, 09:24:15 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on June 06, 2018, 07:27:04 PM
My thoughts about Nazi's, Alt-Right and Antifa are similar like the views described in this article.

QuoteThe initiation of extralegal street violence by self-appointed judges in masks is ethically wrong, legally wrong, and in the case of Antifa, tactically idiotic. (I can think of nothing more likely to contribute to Donald Trump's reelection than roving bands of masked, violent leftists attacking not only Nazis carrying swastikas in the streets, but journalists covering protests, or crowds at Ann Coulter or Milo Yiannopolous speeches.) It is an easy call for me to denounce Antifa members who participate in or endorse extralegal violence. That does not contradict my simultaneous judgment that Antifa's stated end of resisting fascism is laudable. If they showed up in force to protest Nazi rallies, but refrained from initiating the use of force, using it only lawfully in self defense, I would have nothing but praise for them.

Like how similar? If the Nazi's and the alt right weren't violent you, "would have nothing but praise for them"?

My understanding of Tom's post was that he's opposed to any group using violence in protests unless it's in self-defense.  And as incredibly satisfying as it must be to punch out a Nazi, I agree with that.  Fortunately for Antifa, fascists as a group seem inclined to give others a reason to react in self-defense.
Sandy

  

"Life is short, and it is up to you to make it sweet."  Sarah Louise Delany

Dave

Tom, please respond. I will admit that, over some time, I haveboften felt that you fall right of centre. Nothing wrong with thar but . . . My accumulated feeling is that you do tend right far enough to nake this centrist feel a little uncomfortable at times. But, then I have to remind myself that this is an atheist and not a humanist forun!

As a sort of non-liberal centrist, happy to use the big hammer on the far left or far right, I can agree with "fighting" violence by either side. Trouble is it's not easy to do so without large people and equipment (both expensive) resources/reserves. Hence, I think, the extreme state violence in some countries where the "in-power people" would like to eradicate the troublesome "out-of-power" in the cheapest way possible.

To bring up an old British expression, if an obvious "Johnny Foreighner" is laying about ordinary people with a bladed weapon a violent bring-down is valid. Even, in my opinion, if you are not yourself in immediate danger and, say, lob an accurate rock at his head from 15ft away. Can "self-defence"  include the defence of "one's people"  in such a situation?

But, what, for eg, if a white person (assuming you are also a white person) is doing the same thing, in similar circumstsnces, to those of obvious foreign extraction? Do you lob a rock at his head just as readily?

If you do not then you are validly accused of bias.

But self-defence should have a valid legal basis, ideally, be appropriate to the monent and proportional to the offence*. . . Well, just maybe just disproprtionate enough to ensure a win. "Getting one's self-defence in first" , in a aggressive physical form, is not valid and invites similar retaluation. But then, that may just be the strategy.

"I do violent things to foreigners/political opponents because they do violent things to my people," can only be in any way valid if your violence is offered to the actual perpetrators at the time of the act,

*I have to say I consider that, as a little guy with a serious heart problem, "proportional" relates as much to my disadvantages and vulnerabilities as to the type and level of physical violence offered to me - I am not a pacifist, my car might be a valid weapon of "aggressive defence", in my mind, in certain circumstances.





Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Recusant

I wonder whether anybody aside from Tom62 and me has bothered to read the article that he linked.

"How to Distinguish Between Antifa, White Supremacists, and Black Lives Matter" | The Atlantic
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Dave

#57
Quote from: Recusant on June 08, 2018, 09:07:20 AM
I wonder whether anybody aside from Tom62 and me has bothered to read the article that he linked.

"How to Distinguish Between Antifa, White Supremacists, and Black Lives Matter" | The Atlantic
I scanned through it before, scanned a bit slower again.

Can't disagree with the authot, as I have said it is a person's actions that really count - the gratuitoualy violent law officer is no better than the gratuitously violent member of any racial or political group.

Self-defence, or the defence of innocents, may well be justfied. Violence for any other purpose is not. But, in societies where the carrying of firearms is approved and common, I can understand the police making the assumption that a suspect is armed is also valid.

What bothers me is the evidence on which those police decide an individual is suspicious and the apparent hair-trigger nervousness. The katter may be partly due to inadequate situation training? Some may be due to a racial bias though.

Something like one of the original complaints by  Robinson, that the race of perpetrators was being hidden, it is not that easy to find stats over here regarding the racial breakdown of crime. Are more of the current knife crimes carried out by blacks or whites? Though this matters not in absolute terms it counts in terms of public perception. And public perception is the media in which racism grows, fed by the shit Robinson et al spew out.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Bad Penny II

If you're not with us you're against us and a Nazi too.
Take my advice, don't listen to me.

Davin

Quote from: Recusant on June 07, 2018, 09:45:04 PM
Quote from: Davin on June 07, 2018, 08:58:57 PMFrom my past experiences with you combined with your characterizing my question as a "gratuitously uncharitable" interpretation in your "putting it mildly," I cannot accept that you were being charitable towards me. Yours appears to be a very uncharitable comment even if slyly worded.

You're completely entitled to your opinion, Davin.
Thanks, but it's not just an opinion, there's a whole history there.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.